Third Partying
Now that this election is over, we can do some more reflecting. Below are the candidates, their party if any, percentage of the vote, total votes, and electoral votes. (Full list)
Ralph Nader, EPF 1% 672,639 0
Bob Barr, Ind 0% 497,145 0
Chuck Baldwin, AKI 0% 179,016 0
Cynthia McKinney, Grn 0% 145,706 0
Alan Keyes, AIP 0% 36,113 0
Ron Paul, CST 0% 19,852 0
Gloria La Riva, Ind 0% 7,330 0
Roger Calero, Ind 0% 7,182 0
Brian Moore, Ind 0% 6,558 0
After hearing from all the people that said they were going to vote third party – and I think every single one of them made a point to speak to me – this is the result. What message was sent? Better yet, what are we to make of this?
a) The Internet has a disproportionate number of kooks and is not reflective of the greater society.
b) Many people were arguing in bad faith and calls to vote 3rd party were really just calls to get out of the way.
c) We are not in a parliamentary system and calls to consider candidates from 3rd parties should not be taken seriously.
Discuss.
Comments are closed.
We vote third party because we the two main party candidates don’t reflect our views. If we don’t put up some resistance, then that will continue. If a third party candidate gets a significant amount of support, than one of the main parties will adopt the most popular parts of that platform. That has happened in the past, and will happen again.
Unfortunately, the two main parties have made it harder and harder for third party candidates to have a voice, and so we are told what our positions are, rather than the opposite.
Another way of looking at it:
Obama, Dem 53% 65,089,508 364
McCain, GOP 46% 57,167,196 162
What are we to make of this?
a) The offline world has a disproportionate number of clueless plumbers and hockey moms and is not reflective of the politically informed connected world.
b) Many people were arguing in bad faith and calls to vote major party were really just calls to get out of the way.
c) We are not in a parliamentary system and calls to consider candidates from major parties should not be taken seriously.
I’m not very sympathetic to the whole third party idea myself (though I did flirt with so voting this time). People have a much better shot at changing one of the two major parties to be more in line with their views than they do at creating a viable third party that shares those views.
In general, if you don’t think that either major political party reflects your combination of views, it’s probably because your particular combination of political views is just not very popular. Nothing wrong with that, of course. But one must begin by correctly diagnosing the problem.
a.
look at the catholic anarchist for example
I know many people who voted third party. There are many people who would vote third party if the candidates were listed on the ballot. There is a widening number of registered Independents in the country, and a growing number of people who are not satisfied with a two party system. Perot in 1992 got HOW MANY votes?? Don’t forget. We will never be able to have a viable third (fourth, fifth, etc.) option as long as campaign financing is the way that it is. It needs to change… dramatically.
It means an unfortunate amount of decent people are willing to cooperate with grave evil to get… exactly what in return?
Chris,
Are you saying that voting for a third party candidate is to cooperate with grave evil? I am hoping that isn’t your message, but if it is, that would, perhaps, be the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard anyone say on this blog. –jn
Here’s the main problem:
How many third party candidates were listed above? Nine of them.
How many votes did they get collectively? 1, 571,160. This is about half a percent of the vote.
If they pooled their resources and united behind one third party candidate, the numbers would increase exponentially. Here is what needs to happen first. There needs to be a grass roots organization that places third party leaders in local governments and then slowly moves them into state governments. People need to learn slowly at a local level that there is a new way to do politics in the internet age. We really need to work as third party people in advertising our candidates online and through youtube. People need to see that there are other options.
For some reason this:
reminded me of this:
“We will never be able to have a viable third (fourth, fifth, etc.) option as long as campaign financing is the way that it is. It needs to change… dramatically. ”
I think the solution is to change the way votes seat candidates. What if you increased the size of each district by 3x, and seated the top three vote getters in the district. That would automatically produce a 3rd party. But really it would produce a multitude of 3rd parties, because there would be a different third party in many different districts.
The reciprocal of the argument that minor parties shouldn’t get one’s vote, it seems to me, is that one is obligated to vote for a major party candidate.
I can’t agree.
I am responsible for how I cast my own vote; I disagree that I am responsible for predicting how everyone else will cast theirs. I must make my best judgment for who I think is best entitled to my vote. And, in the current political climate, that will be for the candidate who is most credibly and sincerely opposed to abortion “rights”. This year, that was Sarah Palin — but it was almost Chuck Baldwin.
In any case, it’s not a sin to lose an election, only to vote for an evil candidate.
I am responsible for how I cast my own vote; I disagree that I am responsible for predicting how everyone else will cast theirs.
In turn I will disagree. Part of virtue is acting with prudence. Losing is sinful in so much as one had the ability to win. Ignorance can reduce sin. It does not however make something right with the added caveat that we are speaking of an area where knowledge is required.